Edward Conard

Top Ten New York Times Bestselling Author

  • “A full-throated defense of economic dynamism.” - The Wall Street Journal
  • “Unintended Consequences provides a provocative interpretation of the causes of the global financial crisis and the policies needed to return to rapid growth. Whether you agree or not, this analysis is well worth reading.” - Nouriel Roubini, New York University; Chairman, Roubini Global Economics
  • “…a very valuable contribution.” - Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and director of the National Economic Council, president emeritus, Harvard University
  • “Unintended Consequences should be read by anyone who takes for granted the superiority of progressive taxation and has not thought carefully about the trade-offs involved.” - The New Republic
  • “…a very valuable contribution.” - Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and director of the National Economic Council, president emeritus, Harvard University
  • “…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • “…a comprehensive explanation of the modern economy.” - Julian Robertson, Founder, Tiger Management
  • “Unintended Consequences represents the most cogent and persuasive analysis of the Financial Crisis to date.” - Andrei Shleifer, 1999 John Bates Clark Medal Winner
  • “Unintended Consequences offers deep and well-argued analyses on almost every issue.” - The New York Times
  • “There are an amazing number of good ideas and interesting points made in Unintended Consequences. The thinking underlying it, and the obvious depth of understanding of the author, are very impressive.” - Steven Levitt, coauthor of Freakonomics; 2004 John Bates Clark Medal
  • “…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
  • “…serious thinking for serious thinkers. …a thought-provoking blueprint for growing middle- and working-class incomes.” - Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts
Upside of Inequality Oxford Unintended Consequences
Buy the Books
  • Macro Roundup
  • About Roundup
  • About Ed Conard
  • Highlights
  • Topics
  • Subscribe
Edward Conard
  • twitter
  • facebook
  • linkedin
  • youtube
  • Email
  • Text Message (SMS)
  • Twitter/X
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • WhatsApp Message
Subscribe to Macro Roundup Emails
  • Mentions 36
  • Primary focus 2
Showing 2 database articles primarily about Intangibles
Currently filtering by:
  • Remove Intangibles
  • Remove "primary topics only" restriction
  • Remove 'Database'
Show all 7,196 articles
For whatever topics you select (currently: Intangibles):
Choose search scope

Your importance filter 'Database' shows fewer articles.

Remove filters to see full article counts

Trading Stages in the Company Life Cycle

Michael Mauboussin and Dan Callahan Morgan Stanley
Date Posted:
September 27, 2023

The spread between return on invested capital and the weighted average cost of capital is highest early in a firm’s life cycle and then declines until late in a firm’s life cycle. @mjmauboussin

We examined the spread between return on invested capital (ROIC) and weighted average cost of capital (WACC) for companies that did an initial public offering from 1990 to 2022. We expected to see low or negative spreads between ROIC and WACC for companies newly listed, rising spreads as they mature, and a decline in senescence. But what we found was nearly the opposite. The spread at the date of the IPO was high and narrowed before stabilizing around year five.

Related Articles:

  • Birth, Death, and Wealth Creation — As firms have stayed private longer wealth creation has shifted from public to private markets. @mjmauboussin
  • The Economics of Inequality in High-Wage Economies — United States Income, Wealth, Consumption, and Inequality Diana Furchtgott-Roth
  • Data Update 5 for 2023: Pathways to Profitability — The median return on capital for an American firm in January 2023 is 7.4%, which is above the 5.6% cost of capital at the start of 2022, but below the 9.6%…
  • Intangibles
  • Productivity
    • Investment
Previous articleSeptember 26, 2023Pentagon Plan to Buy Thousands of Drones Faces Looming SnagsThe U.S. Department of Defense wants to buy thousands of drones in the next 18 months and as many as 2,000 larger uncrewed jets, but is running into supply constraints of both material and skilled labor.Next articleSeptember 27, 2023US Capital is Depreciating FasterUS net investment has declined from its 1950-80 average of 10% of GDP to 5%. @TimothyTTaylor argues that the cause is increased investment in information technology that depreciates more quickly than plant and equipment.
Showing 1 database article primarily about Intangibles

Globalization and Profitability of US Firms: The Role of Intangibles

Bullipe Chintha, Ravi Jagannathan and Sri Sridhar National Bureau of Economic Research
Date Posted:
March 6, 2024
Is Database:
Database
Is Important:
Important

During 2003-19, the mean EBIT margin of US public companies increased by 11.5% vs. 1984-2002, driven by a 47.4% increase in foreign profitability for S&P 500 firms, while domestic profitability remained flat.

We find that the overall profitability of US firms as measured by the ratio of aggregate Earnings Before Interest and Taxes to aggregate Sales (EBIT Margin, EBITM), increased significantly following increased globalization heralded by China’s entry into WTO in December 2001. We find that the increase in EBITM is driven primarily by the increased foreign profitability of S&P 500 firms, which are larger and spend significantly more on R&D than firms not in S&P 500 index (ex-S&P 500) and have greater intangible intensity than ex-S&P 500 firms. Even among S&P 500 firms, those firms that had higher intangible intensities as measured by higher R&D/Sales and Intangible Assets/Sales ratios had higher increases in their foreign profitability. Neither S&P 500 nor ex-S&P 500 firms experienced any increase in their domestic EBITM following increased globalization, consistent with increased import competition. In the aggregate, the average annual profitability of US public firms in 2003-2019 increased by 11.5% of 1984-2002 profitability. This increase was primarily driven by foreign profitability increasing by 47.4% for firms in the S&P 500 index, which are larger and have more intangible assets created by R&D and SG&A expenditures.

Related Articles:

  • The Curious Incident of the Elevated Profit Margins — James Montier @GMOInsights notes that American firms’ profit margins have been supported by persistent fiscal deficits and argues that the current…
  • End of an Era: The Coming Long-Run Slowdown in Corporate Profit Growth and Stock Returns — Michael Smolyansky @federalreserve argues the decline in interest and corporate tax rates mechanically explains 40% of real growth in corporate profits between…
  • Corporate Profits in the Aftermath of COVID-19 — New @federalreserve research demonstrates elevated corporate profit margins during the pandemic period were a function of government spending and lower…
  • Intangibles
  • Productivity
    • Investment

US Capital is Depreciating Faster

Timothy Taylor Conversable Economist
Date Posted:
September 27, 2023
Is Database:
Database
Is Important:
Important

US net investment has declined from its 1950-80 average of 10% of GDP to 5%. @TimothyTTaylor argues that the cause is increased investment in information technology that depreciates more quickly than plant and equipment.

Gross investment has typically been 20-25% of GDP over time, although in recent years it’s been closer to the lower end of that range. From the 1950s up into the 1980s, net investment was (very roughly) 10% of GDP. Thus, it was plausible to say that in a typical year, a little more than half of gross investment went to replace capital that was wearing out, and a little less than half of gross investment was actually new, net investment growing the capital stock. But in the last decade or so, gross investment has been about 20% of GDP, and net investment has fallen to about 5% of GDP. In other words, gross investment as a share of GDP has fallen a bit, but not too much. The real change is that about three-quarters of investment is now going to replace capital that has worn out, so net investment is much lower.

Related Articles:

  • Capital Allocation — .@mjmauboussin shows capital expenditures net of depreciation as a percentage of sales peaked in 1988 at 6.9%. Over the past decade it has averaged 1.8% and…
  • Intangibles
  • Productivity
    • Investment
© Copyright 2026 Coherent Research Institute · All Rights Reserved · Privacy · Terms